SZRNV v Minister for Immigration

[2012] FMCA 553

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES COURT OF AUSTRALIA

SZRNV v MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & ANOR [2012] FMCA 553

MIGRATION – Application for review of decision of Refugee Review Tribunal – no appearance at first Court date – application dismissed pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) – costs ordered.

Federal Magistrate Court Rules 2001 (Cth), r.13.03C
Migration Act 1958 (Cth), s.476

Applicant: SZRNV

First Respondent: MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

Second Respondent: REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

File Number: SYG 1265 of 2012

Judgment of: Nicholls FM

Hearing date: 27 June 2012

Date of Last Submission: 27 June 2012

Delivered at: Sydney

Delivered on: 27 June 2012

REPRESENTATION

The Applicant: No Appearance

Appearing for the Respondent: Ms G Thangasamy

Solicitors for the Respondent: Sparke Helmore

ORDERS

1. The application made on 8 June 2012 is dismissed pursuant to Rule 13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court Rules2001 (Cth).

2. The applicant pay the first respondent’s costs set in the amount of $1,296.00.

FEDERAL MAGISTRATES
COURT OF AUSTRALIA
AT SYDNEY

SYG 1265 of 2012

SZRNV

Applicant

And

MINISTER FOR IMMIGRATION & CITIZENSHIP

First Respondent

REFUGEE REVIEW TRIBUNAL

Second Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

(Ex tempore; Revised from Transcript)

1. I have before me an application by the Minister that the applicant’s substantive application be dismissed pursuant to r.13.03C(1)(c) of the Federal Magistrates Court 2001 (Cth) (“the Rules”). On 8 June 2012 the applicant made an application, pursuant to s.476 of the Migration Act 1958 (Cth), seeking review of the decision of the Refugee Review Tribunal (“the Tribunal”), made on 10 May 2012, which affirmed the decision of the respondent Minister’s delegate to refuse a protection visa to the applicant.

2. I took into evidence today two documents:

   1)A letter from the Minister’s solicitor to the applicant at his address for service, dated 15 June 2012, advising him that if he failed to attend at the “… scheduled directions hearing in your matter we will seek orders” that his application be dismissed and that he pay the Minister’s costs (Respondent’s Exhibit 1 – “RE1”).

   2)A letter from the Minister’s solicitor to the applicant at his address for service, dated 18 June 2012, reminding him of his matter’s listing today and, in the event of his non-appearance, that the Minister will seek to have his application dismissed and a costs order made against him (Respondent’s Exhibit 2 – “RE 2”).

3. I am satisfied, given what is on the face of the application to the Court, and taking into account RE1 and RE2, that the applicant has had reasonable notice of today’s Court date in relation to his application. Further, that he was on reasonable notice as to the importance of attending, or arranging some representation for the purpose, and of the possible consequence of his failure to do so.

4. It is now 9.55 am. That is 40 minutes beyond the scheduled time. There has been no appearance by the applicant. There has been no communication that I am aware of to the Court’s Registry that the applicant had any difficulty in attending today. Nor was any adjournment sought.

5. In the circumstances, the applicant’s absence remains unexplained. I can see no reason not to proceed to make the order as sought by the Minister and as provided for in the Rules of this Court.

6. The Minister also seeks a costs order.  It is appropriate that I proceed to consider that today. Further, it is appropriate that a costs order be made in the circumstances. The applicant had notice of the possibility that such an order could be made should he not attend or take steps to present his case.

7. As to the amount, the amount sought is, in all the circumstances, a reasonable amount. I will make the order in the amount sought by the Minister.

I certify that the preceding seven (7) paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment of Nicholls FM

Date:  7 September 2012